Republicans may be poised to do well in November, but long term they face the electoral equivalent of a ticking time bomb: unduring unpopularity among the growing Latino voting bloc. Conventional wisdom holds that the main reason for this is the Republican position on immigration.

So most proposed strategies for increasing the GOP share of the Latino vote now focus on changing that position. The Republican Party, this scenario goes, should get behind a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the country and expand legal immigration going forward. President George W. Bush embraced this approach, and exit polls showed him carrying 44 percent of Latinos in his 2004 reelection race.

Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

Later, this figure was adjusted down to roughly 40 percent — still solid, but less historic given Ronald Reagan's 39 percent in 1984. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was as identified with comprehensive immigration reform as Bush, and he lost the Latino vote to Barack Obama by 67 percent to 32 percent in 2008.

McCain did flip-flop on immigration during the primaries, taking a tougher line. But he also claimed credit for doing more than Obama to legalize undocumented workers when talking to Latinos during the general election.

It is not at all clear that dropping their enforcement-first position on immigration would net Republicans many votes. The issue is actually less important to Latinos than is generally assumed.

Far from being fired up by Arizona's crackdown, for example, a recent Pew Hispanic Center poll shows that only about half of Latino registered voters plan to participate on Nov. 2. Latino Republicans, however, were somewhat more likely to turn out than Latino Democrats.

In terms of which issues registered Latino voters consider most important, immigration ranked fifth out of seven. Latinos were more concerned about education, jobs, health care and the budget deficit. An older Pew survey of Latino voters from 2002 found that 48 percent said there were too many immigrants in the United States; an additional 40 percent said there was the right amount, and only 7 percent believed there were too few.

Latino attitudes about immigration are perhaps best described as ambivalent. Though immigrants, both legal and illegal, are often members of extended Latino American families, they can also be economic competitors. Moreover, five-eighths of registered Latino voters are born in the United States. Legal immigrants and U.S. natives frequently take a dim view of illegal immigration, regardless of ethnicity.

Readers' Comments (17)

Europe is finally waking up and seeing that this unending immigration is a deteriment to their societies. Immigrants who come in leagally and assimilate into the society of the country they have entered are fine. It's the immigrants who won't learn the language of their new country and keep themselves separate that are the problem. Other countries are finally seeing that open borders are not the way to go. Every country wants to maintain its own culture. If an immigrant doesn't want to assimilate then he should stay home and try to improve his own country.

Immigration reform is one of the dems latino woes. The dems are frantically trying to make it seem as if they are the pro-immigration reform party, but they are clearly the party that thinks their Latino constituent are stupid enough to believe their empty rhetoric. The dems are trying to attack the republicans by painting them as being "anti-immigration reform", but it is obvious to anyone that has the common sense that God gave a snow tire that is the democrats who take their latino support for granted.

It was the republicans that spearheaded bi-partisan immigration reform measures in 2005, 2006 and 2007. People like John McCain, Lindsey Gramnisty, Ted Kennedy and even George Bush pushed immigration reform. Much of Bush's low ratings at the end of his presidency can be attributed to many members of his base abandoning him because of his hard amnesty push.

Many hispanics will claim that it is the democrats that embrace their cause and it is the republican racists that hate them. The only question that I have for pro-immigration people is; why didn't the democrats push for immigration reform when they controlled the White House, had a massive advantage in the House and an almost fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate? People like independent Joe Lieberman and republicans like McCain, Graham and other would have supported the democrats and the immigration reform would have easily passed. The dems didn't even have to write any new legislation. All the had to do was put a new name and date on the McCain - Kennedy legislation and held a vote.

Remember that Obama and the dems proudly proclaimed "we won the election, we can do what we want, you can't stop us so just get over it". Why didn't the dems pass immigration reform. Was Obama's partying more important than immigration reform. Were the Senate hearings on steroid use in professional sports more important than immigration reform. Was the after the fact hearings on AIG bonus payments really more important than immigration reform? I guess Harry Reid who directs the agenda of the various senate committees cared more about steroid use than working for the hispanics who give their allegiance to the democrat party. I remember that the dems and Obama had many discussion about getting involved in coming up with a play-off system to force upon college basketball. Wow, college basketball play-offs are a bigger priority to the dems than discussions about immigration reform.

The dems had the chance to pass immigration reform last year when they held all the cards and had the support of many key republicans, but they decided to urinate on their hispanic constituents. Just look at the things the dems rammed through that the republicans and the general public fought tooth and nail. The dems were correct when they said the republicans could not stop them. It is very safe politically to promote something you don't believe in if you think it will fail and you can use the effort to blast your opponents. I believe the reason the dems did not take up the immigration issue when they could have easily passed any reform they wanted is because they are closet racists and did not want to lose the opportunity to use the issue to bash republicans.

I would ask all of our hispanic friends to ask all democrats who claim that republicans are anti-immigration and racist just two questions.... WHY DIDN'T THE DEMS PASS IMMIGRATION REFORM WHEN THEY HAD AN UNSTOPPABLE MAJORITY WITH REPUBLICAN SUPPORT? WHY DID THE MAJORITY OF DEMS ALLOW A FEW HISPANIC HATING DEMS TO KEEP IMMIGRATION REFORM OFF OF THE TABLE IN 2009? Could the answer to that question be that many dems who claim to support immigration reform are actually closet racists?

Far from being fired up by Arizona's crackdown, for example, a recent Pew Hispanic Center poll shows that only about half of Latino registered voters plan to participate on Nov. 2. Latino Republicans, however, were somewhat more likely to turn out than Latino Democrats

The cracker jacks in this country have you fooled...........................Only to fool themselves.

Every Latino I know can't wait to vote! In their own little way, they can put a foot up the arses of ignorance and one dimensional ideology in this country.

The cowards are sh*****g bricks. If they weren't they couldn't be pulling gong show antics with telling Latinos to stay home. The Great White Nopes are that stupid? They just opened up ANOTHER CAN of political whoop a**, spearheaded by Latino Americans.

No worries.............In 5 years one dimensional whites will be hasbeens who've been reduced to whining as a full time job. In 10 years, Latino Political power will be formidable and flexing with ease. In 20 years, whites will be a minority in America.

Hmmmmmmm, do you think they're reading their "GOOD BOOKS"?

THE FIRST SHALL BE LAST AND THE LAST SHALL BE FIRST. (Read it and weep)

Denmark Vesey is promoting enthnic oppression and ethnic hostility, hatred and fear, as well as creating an undemocratic nation where one demographic is abused, mistreated and denied fairness by other demographics. self evident truth dictates that no excuse can justify such abuse.

There are two major flaws in this story. One, "latinos", Hispanics" or what PC term is used are not a monolythic group, nor a racially pure one. They comprise those with a Spanish surname, that's it. They include pure white Spaniards, meso-american indian peasants, Asians from the Phillipines, blacks, etc. They are as diverse as any so called group can be. As such their politics are also all over the map. There is no monolythic "latino" voting block, a MSM myth.

The other major flaw in this story is "latino" turnout. It is the lowest of any "ethnic" group in the US. Less than 1/2 of them that register bother to vote at all and when they do, it's also all over the political map. Therefore they are not a factor in this election. The author is ignorant of these facts by omitting them.

Many times I see "journalists" claim the republican party is dying. What they also fail to understand is many of those that currently vote Democrat will one day become successful. By then the democratic party will have left them. What ever form or name the future conservative movement has, the time tested and proven elements will survive and thrive as long as we have a free market economy.

This is why the Alinsky crowd in the Oval Office wants to deconstruct our system.

One might think from this article that the attitudes of 121 million non Latino voters toward amnesty and illegal immigration doesn't matter in the election calculus, compared with 10 million or so Latino voters.

I largely agree with you, but the votes you claim the Democrats had are largely illusory. The reason they needed Republicans was because not all Democrats dared to fly in th face and the interests of their blue collar constituents who are harmed by illegal immigration. Right now, the Rust Belt is shaping up as the "swing" for the next election, largely because of unemployment. Michigan has the 3rd highest unemployment rate in the nation, topped only by illegal-alien heavy California and Harry Reid's home state of Nevada. It wasn't as bad in 2007, but bad enough in the Rust Belt with plant closures, layoffs, and the decline of the auto industry that it was political suicide for a Democratic Congresscritter to support amnesty.

This WAS their country. The only people here were Indians, and they didn't have a nation to "immigrate" to. If they had had, and had had laws against immigration that they enforced, it would have been better for them. As it is, you appear to think that the US as it is today just sprouted fully grown rather than being the result of the settlers. You'd do well to remember that countries such as Mexico actually are quite wealthy, have much the same resources as the U.S., but haven't done as well in providing prosperity for MOST of their citizens. The Protestant Ethic apparently has something going for it. Too bad that Mexico got mainly Catholics.

If "Latino" political power is so great, then how come the countries that Latinos are ALREADY the vast majority in are such messes? How is it that Mexico, a DEMOCRACY, is so unpleasant that its citizens would rather come here illegally than live there?

"...So most proposed strategies for increasing the GOP share of the Latino vote now focus on changing that position. The Republican Party, this scenario goes, should get behind a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the country and expand legal immigration going forward..."

I don't know where the author gets this information, I have not heard about any "strategy" to take this stand. In fact, it is the opposite - as well as it better damn well be. It is inconceivable that both major parties are basing their longevity on catering to the scum of the earth oozing into the country from Mexico. If the GOP returns or even thinks about amnesty and expanding legal immigration it will be the last thing they ever do. So now are political process is held hostage by third world filth who are capable of bankrupting this country with their uncontrolled and irresponsible procreation?

So if "non-partisan" forces get down on their knees and suck the Latinos dry, legalizing 20-30 million dregs for the sake of political power, where does that leave the country's future political contests? That basically means that "Latinos" have gained political control over America, exactly the strategy of radical reconquista-type activists from the land of the open sewer. Any attempt at even one more amnesty by the Washington oligarthy will result in insurrection in the streets. Just bring it on.

"...A poll conducted by ASU researchers indicates that 81 percent of registered Latino voters oppose SB 1070 either strongly or somewhat that and 59 percent blame Republicans. But the poll also indicated that 60 percent of Latino voters also blame Democrats for not doing enough to block the law."